UK DEPLOYS MISSILES ON RUSSIAS BORDER

From the Mail on Sunday November the 13th 2016 "so it must be true"!!!

Britain is to deploy batteries of long range missiles on Russias border for the first time since the Cold War.
The guided Multiple Launch Rocket Systems (GMLRS)will be moved to Estonia next year, amid fears Russian President Vladimir Putin could be planning to invade.
About 800 British Troops will be stationed there as part of a 15 Nation NATO forcedefending the Baltic States.
Among that number will be 25 Royal Artillery soldiers tasked with operating the GMLRS, which can fire up to a dozen 200Ib warheads per minute with a range of up to 45 miles.
The vehicle mounted rocket system will be complemented by British drones, RAF Typhoon jets and Challenger 2 tanks.

Sorry for my cynicsm this time in the morning, but why have secrets, they should have named the soldiers and given out their addresses and bank details too, whilst they were at it.
Who writes this stuff, or more importantly who feeds them the facts?:rolleyes:
Well.............. just got the Challengers all back from Germany at great cost, for them to go straight back, because those that are supposedly in the know in the Ministry of Defence said the threat from Russia had deminished.

I seem to recall hearing in the media within about the last week or so that the U.K. is going to refurbish/upgrade the Challenger 2 M.B. Tank soon. One would hope that the government department which is organising the refurbishment of the Challenger Tank has actually communicated it's intentions to the the government department which is hoping to deploy the vehicles to Estonia, as mentioned above.

I would imagine this deployment has been shouted from the rooftops of Whitehall by the top brass Gil.

Lots of journalists being briefed "off the record" as some elements of the MOD finally wake up, smell the coffee and start spinning!

Eyes fixed firmly on the next defence rewiew, to persuade the next Government why we need new tanks, more troops etc as the Russian bear is about to overrun Europe..

You only had to see the clapped out black smoke belching old aircraft carrier strike group plodding through the English Channel with its equally ancient Su33's arranged on deck to see what a threat the Russians really are to the west!

Not saying we don't need some serious defence investment though, love to see defence properly funded.

I wholeheartedly agree with Trump regarding the p*** poor state of European defence spending, why should a financially broke USA largely pay for and underwrite NATO, while some NATO members spend as little as 1% GDP .. and rely on Uncle Sam to save the day when things go south

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flying10uk

I seem to recall hearing in the media within about the last week or so that the U.K. is going to refurbish/upgrade the Challenger 2 M.B. Tank soon. One would hope that the government department which is organising the refurbishment of the Challenger Tank has actually communicated it's intentions to the the government department which is hoping to deploy the vehicles to Estonia, as mentioned above.

---

I wouldn't hold your breath F10, the scope of the upgrade is being downgraded and it remains far from clear if all the remaining active inventory will be upgraded.

It would make sense to refurbish the Challengers in storage first, not the active examples.

The stored examples are probably now in various states of disrepair and robbed of spare parts F10.

It was suggested to me, several years ago, that I shouldn't expect to see a replacement for the Challenger2 Tank for the foreseeable future and this was partly because there are many who consider the M. B. Tank to have very limited military use in todays world. Personally I wouldn't necessarily agree with this and the same was said about the aircraft carrier in the mid to late 1970s here in the U.K.. Just after the U.K. had scrapped the last of it's large Fleet carriers it was discovered that carriers are still useful military assets to have as was borne out in the South Atlantic in the early 1980s.

If you could see the effect of a Javelin top-hit on an MBT you'd come to the conclusion that really, tanks - ANY tanks - are obsolete. We used to think that the Milan was the bee all and end all. Until I saw a Javelin hit. Tank hulks used as hard targets used to last for ages and ages. Not any more! Just a few days and they're shredded almost vapourised steel plates. Even the controllers are simplicity itself to operate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

If you could see the effect of a Javelin top-hit on an MBT you'd come to the conclusion that really, tanks - ANY tanks - are obsolete. We used to think that the Milan was the bee all and end all. Until I saw a Javelin hit. Tank hulks used as hard targets used to last for ages and ages. Not any more! Just a few days and they're shredded almost vapourised steel plates. Even the controllers are simplicity itself to operate.

---

Agreed Peter, one of the very few occasions that modern ATG (current generation) anti tank missiles have been used in action a against enemy armour was when an RAF Tornado GR4 ripple fired it's Brimstone anti armour missiles during the Libya campaign and destroyed an armoured formation in a single pass.

The follow on mk2 and the next generation SPEAR 3 (in development), will make Tanks little more than iron coffin's of the future battlefield.

Future ground based weapon systems, will, like the air based systems, no doubt seal the MBT's fate ten years down the road.

By all means upgrade the Challenger 2 for today, but don't waist money on a soon to be obsolete replacement.

We may find that new types of armour plating that currently don't exist perhaps get invented that better protect the occupants of the Tank in the future.. All through the history of the Tank there has been a race between the technicians and inventors who develop the Tank and those who work on counter measures against it.

ECM works, but not against a WIRE GUIDED missile;)

I think an evolved Tank will have a place on the modern battlefield for years to come, but fielded in smaller numbers. Not in the conventional blitzkrieg style mass formation attack. The days of 60 ton monsters are coming to an end, due to their increasing vulnerability as we have discussed.

I would think tanks will evolve over the next 20 years, get smaller and lighter again, so they can be air transportable and critically employ sophisticated low observable technology's (to help counter the growing GTG/ATG the missile threat), more reconnaissance and support orientated, with the ability to take and hold ground when required.

The only reason MBT's still have a place in most armies, is the fact that most potential adversaries currently lack the expensive and sophisticated weapon systems to knock them out. The rapidly growing size, capability and sophistication of the defence industrial complex in China (evolving at a jaw dropping speed) and the proliferation of its products far and wide, will be a game changer for the west and we better be ready to respond with new equipment and doctrines to counter it.

Tanks in this new age of warfare, against primarily a "terrorist threat" (at the moment), need to provide such flexibility, so not to be too cumbersome and heavy that they respond negatively in their all weather terrain locations to be able to succeed IMHO.
Tracked vehicles by their very nature make them extremely vulnerable.

They should be built in all cases to defeat all high velocity rounds and also deflect rocket propelled hand held launchers by their very design and panelled shape using Chobham armour or new plate designs.
This should be alround defence and not just three sides, as many tank designs leave the back end vulnerable. Side gunnery IMHO is also needed with better viewing equipment to provide all round defence not just the way the turret is looking.
Now we on Milsurps have brainstormed the wish list for the new wave of tank, someone will pick it up :wave::lol:

I've sketched a "Dan Dare" design on the back of a *** packet Gil, lets get in patented a bit quick!:lol:

...................this is what happens when you get it ALL wrong

It'll buff out.

Yep, Buff out the scratches and use it as a howitzer with that bent barrel!

I think it was an Isreali tank. The barrel is the only thing beside the two lines holding it in place.
Short report and then a charge, and then into the room with striped windows and bars for a short stay:madsmile:

It was quite interesting to see the results during the last Gulf War when there was a number of, limited size, Tank on Tank, engagements between the Iraqi Army and the U.K./U.S.. I believe that during this conflict the U.K. was involved in it's largest Tank battle since WW2 which resulted in the total or almost total loss of Iraqi Tanks with no loss of Challenger 2s. During this conflict I don't believe that the U.K./U.S. had an advantage over their opponents just with their Tanks; I believe that there was also an advantage over the Iraqis with the soldiers using the Tanks. The U.K./U.S. soldier, at the time of the last Gulf War, was better trained, more highly motivated and could think for himself much more than the average Iraqi soldier, in my opinion.

Thats what happens when you are trained by the Russians who only know how to throw hundreds of troops or tanks at a problem with limited tactics training, and expect volume to win the day, and cascade the bad habits "luckily" to those we meet on todays battlefields!!.

What wins the day, is calm, properly trained soldiers he respond correcty to aggression effectively!:thup:

Think the merger of 1st and 2nd The Royal Tank Regiment is proof regarding the future....... although as pointed out not that many Armies in the world has the capability to knock a tank out apart from another tank.....

Quite surprised to read the following on the net: We have 227 active Challenger 2 tanks – fewer than Switzerland, which has 380 Leopard 2 tanks, despite not having waged any wars in more than 150 years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mrclark303

I would imagine this deployment has been shouted from the rooftops of Whitehall by the top brass Gil.

Lots of journalists being briefed "off the record" as some elements of the MOD finally wake up, smell the coffee and start spinning!

Eyes fixed firmly on the next defence rewiew, to persuade the next Government why we need new tanks, more troops etc as the Russian bear is about to overrun Europe..

You only had to see the clapped out black smoke belching old aircraft carrier strike group plodding through the English Channel with its equally ancient Su33's arranged on deck to see what a threat the Russians really are to the west!

Not saying we don't need some serious defence investment though, love to see defence properly funded.

I wholeheartedly agree with Trump regarding the p*** poor state of European defence spending, why should a financially broke USA largely pay for and underwrite NATO, while some NATO members spend as little as 1% GDP .. and rely on Uncle Sam to save the day when things go south

---

Yes, but the money they save they can use to bribe Congressman so it all works out in the end.

Please don't underestimate the Russian threat; it is vital to the future employment of tens of thousands. :rolleyes: